Etiam pulvinar consectetur dolor sed malesuada. Ut convallis
euismod dolor nec pretium. Nunc ut tristique massa.
Nam sodales mi vitae dolor ullamcorper et vulputate enim accumsan.
Morbi orci magna, tincidunt vitae molestie nec, molestie at mi. Nulla nulla lorem,
suscipit in posuere in, interdum non magna.
Regular scheduled P&Z meeting. 3 Commissioners were absent who tend to have different questions and comments about process, impact, and wording. Lots of major items on the agenda tonight. Huge amount of information to digest in the packet. Unfortunately, P&Z packets are not posted online for public to view and prepare citizen+ input before P&Z makes official recommendations to Council. Scroll down for YouTube video.
Please check back later for addition of documents from P&Z packet as well as time markers. We wanted video posted ASAP.
Look for blue highlighted sections for information about Miners Lake development. City Council had their first reading of Ordinance change to land stability on October 1st. Even though they didn’t have maps or specific details in front of them, Council approved the first reading. The City Attorney advised Council to approve, because “It’s the easiest way.” The City Attorney works for City Hall, not for the residents. City Hall wants to expedite development on Miners Lake. P&Z Commissioners tonight did not ask for maps nor details about planned development.
The only “info” given to Council on Oct 1st. No map, no description, no details about planned developments. Nothing in print. City Hall intentionally set up 1st Reading for ACTION (quick approval), not informed discussion.
This page is from page 376 in Master Ely City Code. It was not provided to Council on Oct 1st. Most likely it was not provided to P&Z in recent months, before they requested additional info. More info than just this page should have been in the Council packet.
Is this what P&Z Commissioners approved tonight? See if you can observe any discussion tonight about why wording like “building permit” and required certification are deleted. “Consult” and “contact” are not the same as “certify.” Look at the extremely loose and vague “if the property owner deems necessary.”
Compare this laissez-faire attitude about Miners Lake development with all the other mandatory (safety) code requirements for homes and businesses.
The original justification City Hall gave to P&Z was, “It’s too expensive to certify it’s safe to build on these areas. So let’s get rid of the whole ordinance.” You (regular person) can’t just build what and how you want on your property. You can NOT say, “I didn’t deem [required process or specs] necessary” or “It’s too expensive.”
This was in P&Z packet tonight. First time something in writing. Areas along Miners Lake are potentially unsafe for development. Look at comments 3, 4 and 6 above in Synopsis of Changes.
We should expand safety and “include properties with inactive Mine shafts” per #4.
If government or lobbyists want unlimited development and an ordinance is blocking that, they claim the ordinance is “unclear.” Council and P&Z are gullible and/or they don’t have time to process so many dense pages to ensure safe development. Do what California did: build a nuclear power plant right on an earthquake fault line.
From the P&Z packet tonight. Listen for someone to read this out loud or cite it, especially the 3rd paragraph.
In the Synopsis of Changes above, notice the “rephrasing” of DNR comments to make people believe it’s perfectly fine to remove land stabilty certification.
Look to the right, 3rd paragraph:
[Local government] can adopt a model ordinance we [MN DNR] write or they may adopt more restrictive standards.”
Ely City Hall wants NO real preventive safety measures or ordinances, so City Hall’s favored developers can build whatever and wherever they want on Miners Lake. Safety and residents be damned. Now the proposed expanded ATV/RV campground in the residential area on Miners Lake will fly through the Board of Adjustment.
Reports from Projects Committee and Scott Knochendorfer, Ely Planning & Zoning Administrator
Updates on meetings re: GreenStep Cities; Ely Climate Group; possible creation of a sub-committee Green Team
New Do-Over Public Hearing in Nov. for Church Subdivision
Tiny Homes developer (full name & address still not disclosed) looking for land
Tues, Oct 29th, 6:30 pm = Joint Study Session with Council to discuss cannabis ordinance
Project for Fire Bldg slowed down to ascertain historical status of buildings
IRRR gave hotel $200K in funding (IRRR not mentioned in Projects minutes
For New and Old Business, recommendations were made to Council. The actual wording as well as what was or was not included in the recommendations wasn’t always clear. Watch to see if anyone asked for exact re-reading before votes were taken. Did the Commissioners really understand and agree to everything they recommended? Really quick “deliberations” tonight. Example:
New Business
Procedures for vacation of right of way (2 pages in P&Z packet). Why was topic suddenly introduced tonight? Apparently no action was taken to update since 2004. Does this relate to other developments being discussed tonight? Yes. Look at the Development Agreement with the Train Depot. What fees will they pay?
Property incentives (2 pages). Very interesting, but why was this topic introduced tonight to P&Z? Should it go to Park & Rec and Tree Board first? There are many cities, states, and organizations that have plans with and without funding. Start with Visions and Comp Plan instead of spending energy reacting to random ideas and proposals. Also, why isn’t the City promoting the generation of ideas coming from the Commissioners themselves (who are involved in OUR community). Our City staff is already overtasked! After goals and objectives are agreed upon AND prioritized, then discuss $$ allocation.
Development agreement for Old Train Depot (5 pages). Many changes and planned businesses including an outdoor amphitheater. Watch the video for details about expanded development to north and south of the depot! This development project needs more space than previously mentioned? Specific details aren’t all written down, then or now. Miners’ Drive, the road itself, might be pushed northward to make room for expansion of this site. Who pays for rebuilding the road? The grant or taxpayers? Supposedly few people use the current public parking on the south side of Miners? So the Depot can have it? New public parking spaces, if necessary, would be built on green area on north side of Miners Drive. Who pays? Very few questions were asked, including, “How does the parking, road changes, and site expansion as well as the outdoor amphitheater or outdoor bar/restaurant fit in with the Veterans Memorial space?” What exactly did the Commissioners agree to and recommend to Council? Did they give approval for all the businesses planned? No questions or comments from Commissioners about increased noise spilling into residential areas. Did they also agree to everything in the 3-page Development Agreement? Is P&Z even tasked to review, agree to or recommend development agreements? FYI: Matthew Stupnik and family (instead of new LLC) are redeveloping the Ely Community Center? What else was missed or not asked?
Old Business
Second-Hand Goods License Ordinance
IUP Process Update – no documents
Land Stability Requirement (14 pages). Very few questions and comments from Commissioners. The DNR said, “Authority is passed from state level to the local level . . .They can adopt a model ordinance we write or they may adopt more restrictive standards.” Ely City Hall wants a LESS restrictive standard. Note the City wants property owner to be responsible for ensuring land is safe . . .[and] consult with geotechnical engineer if the property owner deems necessary.” Notice the City is still NOT providing specific maps. Council asked for maps. Compare with ordinance at Council’s first reading on Oct. 1st.
Next Council meeting on Oct 12th will probably approve the 2nd reading without major discussion.
Dumpster Ordinance (3 pages)
Update City Comp Plan (4 pages) – More papers. Once again, no time to discuss.
Planning & Zoning Oct 15 2024
Regular scheduled P&Z meeting. 3 Commissioners were absent who tend to have different questions and comments about process, impact, and wording. Lots of major items on the agenda tonight. Huge amount of information to digest in the packet. Unfortunately, P&Z packets are not posted online for public to view and prepare citizen+ input before P&Z makes official recommendations to Council. Scroll down for YouTube video.
Please check back later for addition of documents from P&Z packet as well as time markers. We wanted video posted ASAP.
Look for blue highlighted sections for information about Miners Lake development. City Council had their first reading of Ordinance change to land stability on October 1st. Even though they didn’t have maps or specific details in front of them, Council approved the first reading. The City Attorney advised Council to approve, because “It’s the easiest way.” The City Attorney works for City Hall, not for the residents. City Hall wants to expedite development on Miners Lake. P&Z Commissioners tonight did not ask for maps nor details about planned development.
Nothing in print. City Hall intentionally set up 1st Reading
for ACTION (quick approval), not informed discussion.
Compare this laissez-faire attitude about Miners Lake development with all the other mandatory (safety) code requirements for homes and businesses.
The original justification City Hall gave to P&Z was, “It’s too expensive to certify it’s safe to build on these areas. So let’s get rid of the whole ordinance.” You (regular person) can’t just build what and how you want on your property. You can NOT say, “I didn’t deem [required process or specs] necessary” or “It’s too expensive.”
Look at comments 3, 4 and 6 above in Synopsis of Changes.
We should expand safety and “include properties with inactive Mine shafts” per #4.
If government or lobbyists want unlimited development and an ordinance is blocking that, they claim the ordinance is “unclear.” Council and P&Z are gullible and/or they don’t have time to process so many dense pages to ensure safe development. Do what California did: build a nuclear power plant right on an earthquake fault line.
In the Synopsis of Changes above, notice the “rephrasing” of DNR comments to make people believe it’s perfectly fine to remove land stabilty certification.
Look to the right, 3rd paragraph:
[Local government] can adopt a model ordinance we [MN DNR] write or they may adopt more restrictive standards.”
Ely City Hall wants NO real preventive safety measures or ordinances, so City Hall’s favored developers can build whatever and wherever they want on Miners Lake. Safety and residents be damned. Now the proposed expanded ATV/RV campground in the residential area on Miners Lake will fly through the Board of Adjustment.
Reports from Projects Committee and Scott Knochendorfer, Ely Planning & Zoning Administrator
For New and Old Business, recommendations were made to Council. The actual wording as well as what was or was not included in the recommendations wasn’t always clear. Watch to see if anyone asked for exact re-reading before votes were taken. Did the Commissioners really understand and agree to everything they recommended? Really quick “deliberations” tonight. Example:
New Business
Old Business